The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written
for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 22
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte THARWAT F. TADROS and
PHILIP TAYLOR
___________
Appeal No. 2001-2345
Application No. 08/898,627
__________
ON BRIEF
__________
Before WILLIAM F. SMITH, SCHEINER, and ADAMS, Administrative Patent Judges.
WILLIAM F. SMITH, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the final rejection of claims 10
through 22. Subsequently thereto, claims 10 through 15 and 17 were canceled (Paper
No. 22, September 4, 1998).1 This leaves claims 16 and 18 through 22 for our review.
1 Paper No. 22 contains a handwritten statement from the examiner dated
September 22, 1998, stating "Do Not Enter." However, the examiner issued an
Advisory Action on September 24, 1998, which states that the proposed amendment
will be entered upon filing an appeal. The Appeal Brief and Examiner's Answer are
premised upon claims 10 through 15 and 17 being canceled. Accordingly, we will
assume the examiner's handwritten notation on Paper No. 22 is in error.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007